I can see the headline now:
Facebook decides to change policy and you wouldn't believe what happened next!
I can see the headline now:
Also, see this guy's comment about Minnesota... ditto for NS, at least in the winter months.
Depends on what you mean by "growing up."
If you mean, during elementary through high-school, no many of us were probably too busy avoiding being lockered or swirlied.
But by college, and especially in that period shortly afterwards where many geeks I know - while not CEO's - were doing a lot better than the football squad who still worked at McD's and spent weekends drinking beer on the couch.
Those that were missing out were usually due to frankly being poor company in general (as in, other "geeks" didn't want to hang out with them either), having really bad hygiene, or being more interested in D&D than in girls.
Commercial gain does change this picture somewhat. My only counter is that jail-time also imposes a burden on society, whereas a fine that wipes out any profit from the infringement + imposes enough of an additional penalty would probably have worked well enough, and saved the cost of housing this idiot in a cell.
The financial advisor ruins people's lives by abusing a position of trust he's been given. He's also reaping the benefits of his crime and living high on the hog. Often enough, those that have enabled the advisor to run rampant manage to spew a bunch of B.S. excuses about how "shocked" they were and are unaffected.
Meanwhile, the guy who recorded in a theatre is an idiot, but he hasn't ruined anyone's life and hasn't really benefited financially from his act. A significant (but not ruinous) fine would accomplish plenty in terms of penalty. The corporations have also successfully lobbied to have what was once a civil offence which could be resolved between two groups (see: lawsuit) into a criminal act.
Indeed, it could be people who are using TOR but don't want to end up on an NSA watch-list because they have in-depth knowledge of a tool that's probably not well-received by the NSA...
As it stands right now, it is SOP for an admin to block all exit nodes at the incoming router, the IP stack on the machine, the web server, and the application
And there's plenty of reasons to do so. There's a reason that companies have firewalls that block outgoing connections as well as incoming. Or would you rather they allowed traffic from anonymous internet sources to route through their networks?
Home users are a different story, but I don't see why most corps would want to allow TOR. They have enough issues securing their networks as it is (see: UPS breach).
OCRemix initially made a kickstarter for an FFVI music remix. Initially they ran into legal issues with Squaresoft, but apparently sorted that out and then successfully funded the second incarnation.
If a third-party can successfully garner funds and create a prototype, I wonder how many of the big entities would be willing to license such projects for a cut of the profits at the end?
And yet... funded at $504 (of $500).
Maybe people felt it was easier than donating directly to help the guy out, but still...
If you add Battlefield 3 to the PS4, would that increase PS4 adoption? That's not likely, but bringing out Uncharted 4 probably will.
I mean adding a *new* title, possibly as an exclusive title (at least exclusive for the first while).
Something in the currently melting polar ice caps, perhaps. If it (or a chemical that breaks down into it) are in there in some form, they could be getting released as the ice melts.
This is what used to happen in the West, when companies were similarly unrestrained by legislation
Maple Leaf Meats. Deepwater Horizon. Exxon Valdez. Mount Polly Mine. Tepco.
I'd say that the East and the West do a fairly shitty job of enforcing regulation. You can have all the legislation you want but lack of enforcement or monitoring = fail. The West would like to point fingers at China but frankly we've been chasing profits at the expense of health+safety just as much.
Work uniform? If you're in Canada, then the answer is yes (actually, they supply it and you get a stipend for cleaning etc).
Well, it certainly wouldn't be a DCMA complaint, unless you've got the copyright on small members (or signs to small members, perhaps)?
Most likely it would be considered a form of harassment, possibly libel.
In the case of a search engine and to some extent a torrent index though, it's more like "There are signs located in the men's bathroom on fifth avenue, as well as in the back alley on third that say Jones_Supa has a small johnston"
It seems to me that the infringement is alleged, but the ownership shouldn't be. If they can't even come up with something definitive as to *what* is infringed, I would hope they could be liable.